The situation that is the result of various reasons, and partially because of the opposition from the banking lobby. It insists on tightening the rules in order to protect the financial system from the influence of digital economy. However, there is still something to discuss, because the decisions taken by the United States will serve as a guide to action for all other countries of the world.
Many countries would also like to regulate the phenomenon of stablecoins in order to avoid a repeat of situations similar to the one caused by the crack in Terra Luna just a few weeks ago. The crack that caused a series of bankruptcies, which, however, at least for the moment, does not seem strong enough to affect the world of traditional finance.
Despite the fact that we are talking about legislative work with the participation of both parties in the United States, it seems that it was not possible to reach the expected consensus on the law that should regulate the issuance and management of stablecoins in the United States. Actually, according to Reuters reports, the US faced a stalemate that postponed any possible discussion until the end of the summer.
On the other hand, there is also obvious and strong lobbying from banks that would like to get more restrictive rules for issuing and managing wallets, thus trying to beat the competition coming from the cryptocurrency world before it becomes dangerous.
The stablecoin sector is actually tempting for many, given the profits it can bring, and for traditional banks (which are far behind), the possible adoption of such a law will help them return to their previous level without doing anything to offer alternative products.
Stablecoins and the liquidation Effect
Of course, it cannot be denied that it was the stablecoin crisis that caused the liquidation effect, which in a sense disrupted several intermediaries, credit platforms and exchanges. The situation that we have already discussed earlier.
A situation that, at least in our opinion, will be difficult to contain with the help of a special law: when financial systems explode, again metaphorically, there is little that laws and legislators can do except to ban algorithmic stable coins. Such a move would be draconian, since it would ignore such realities as, for example, DAI, which, thanks to excessive collateral, continues to function even in the most outright crisis moments for the industry.
However, regardless of the reasons for the postponement, we believe that it is good that they are not going to adopt such a law yet. The issue is complicated, and to do everything in a few months would mean that we would have to be content with a law adopted without considering various nuances.
That is, unless they want to regulate in order to provide a service to banks, which in any case are greedy for profits, and which this sector can guarantee.